Zimmerman Trial

Use this forum to suggest topics, and to find others to debate with.

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby PavlovianModel146 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:08 pm

Stuartp523 wrote:Pavlovian, you are now one of my favorite people.


Cool, thanks!
"Love is the gravity of the Soul" - Abstract -/-/1988 - 3/11/2013 R.I.P

Image
User avatar
PavlovianModel146
Ringing The Bell
 
Posts: 7137
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:56 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby PavlovianModel146 » Wed Jul 17, 2013 12:13 pm

Oughtist wrote:Hey Pav, I missed the description of Trayvon's behaviour that would equate him with a suspected drunk driver... ?


That wasn't my point, my point was that (unlike me) he wasn't even specifically told not to pursue. He was told he did not need to pursue. After I asked what would happen if I did pursue, I was told there were no legal ramifications.
"Love is the gravity of the Soul" - Abstract -/-/1988 - 3/11/2013 R.I.P

Image
User avatar
PavlovianModel146
Ringing The Bell
 
Posts: 7137
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:56 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:10 pm

Pav, what reason over which Martin had any control, was Zimmerman following him for?

Or was it all just Zimmerman being a mistaken overzealous profiler?
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 27000
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Wed Jul 17, 2013 4:22 pm

Moreno wrote:
Stuartp523 wrote:Moreno, I agree in that he should no longer be able to carry a gun in public, but can you think of a situation when it would ever be anything but reckless for anyone to carry a gun in public?
I'd take away his right completely, not just in public. IOW I don't think he should be trusted to have a gun, period. Then to the general issue....the whole gun thing is a mess. I get along with people who are against the NRA on most things, but I tend to think it is good Americans have guns, given their own government. The focus on the right to carry in public....ah, I don't even want to get into it.


The last thing I want to do is discuss the issue of the legality of guns, but I do think the subject of carrying a gun in public has much merit to the case. If Zimmerman was reckless it was for doing what is legal and apparently widely accepted in Florida. I would never let someone in my apt. if they had a gun on them and if I ran a business I would be very nervous to say the least; I would have to decide if I wanted to risk telling them to get the hell out, reticently helping them with whatever business they came for or calling the police and telling them that someone armed is in my business (and if they tell me that I had no business calling them being that he had a legal permit then fine).

Who are these people who take advantage of the law that allows them to legally carry a gun around in public and why don't we hear more about tragedies that result from their recklessness?
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Wed Jul 17, 2013 5:22 pm

Because Stuart, most reasonable people who carry guns legally aren't actually doing shit like this. They exercise judgment before they take a life.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 27000
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Orbie » Wed Jul 17, 2013 6:34 pm

Smears wrote:Because Stuart, most reasonable people who carry guns legally aren't actually doing shit like this. They exercise judgment before they take a life.






Smears' the statistics are bad: drive by shootings, school ground massacres, terrorist threats, the list is so lang, that it begs the question of who is actually reasonable? In my book, to opurchase a gun is a sign of some irrationality.

Remeber the old saying: "those who live by the gun die by the gun"?

( If you are a hunter after wildlife, may be an excepption).
[size=50][/size]Allone's Obe issance



In answer to your prayer
sincere, the centre of
your circle here,
i stand ; and , without
taking thought,-
i know nothing. But i can

Full well your need-as
you be men
This: Re-Creation. With a
bow,
Then, your obedient

servant now.
One gift is all i find in me,
And that is faithful
memory
Orbie
partly cloudy, with a few showers
 
Posts: 7596
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:34 pm
Location: Night of infinite faith

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Wed Jul 17, 2013 6:59 pm

Smears, have you ever been in public place while carrying a concealed gun? Didn't you say that you woke up one morning after drinking and found someone else's gun? Ok, but maybe that had all taken place inside your house, but that's just one example of the exploits you've shared with us. It's very surprising to me how critical you're being of Zimmerman's actions when you have never said anything to lead me to believe you are one who doesn't on occasion do reckless things. I don't ask that you justify anything you do or even your contrarianism, and I have no criticism of you as a person whatsoever, but it seems to me you have been fortunate.
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby fuse » Wed Jul 17, 2013 7:22 pm

uglypeoplefucking wrote:Zimmerman was looking for a fight that night - it's evident in his statements and actions.

Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


You narrative is not the truth. Neither is the one I just presented, because there is not enough information to judge Zimmerman in total like you want to.
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Wed Jul 17, 2013 7:42 pm

I'm considering trying to argue that the verdict was wrong rather than right, just so I can show what that argument by one relatively informed on the case looks like.
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:24 pm

fuse wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:Zimmerman was looking for a fight that night - it's evident in his statements and actions.

Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


You narrative is not the truth. Neither is the one I just presented, because there is not enough information to judge Zimmerman in total like you want to.


My hat goes off to you, fuse. I tried to bring this sort of thing up at the beginning of the thread and instantly regretted it. I couldn't tolerate the responses.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:29 pm

I'm just trying to be clever, but I imagine the significance of your appreciation for Fuse shouldn't be underestimated being that your hat does not look like it would be easy to remove.
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:32 pm

Not shown in the picture is my chrome sombrero. That's the one that comes off.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby fuse » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:42 pm

The audio for eight 911 witness calls, where the fight, a gunshot, and screaming for help can be heard:
http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/trayvon ... lls-audio/






statiktech wrote:
fuse wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:Zimmerman was looking for a fight that night - it's evident in his statements and actions.

Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


You narrative is not the truth. Neither is the one I just presented, because there is not enough information to judge Zimmerman in total like you want to.


My hat goes off to you, fuse. I tried to bring this sort of thing up at the beginning of the thread and instantly regretted it. I couldn't tolerate the responses.

Thanks, man. I saw your initial posts, good points. People keep thinking I'm defending Zimmerman...I'm just trying not to make assumptions about the case while questioning the assumptions of others. I have learned a lot about this case.
User avatar
fuse
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4588
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:13 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:04 am

obe wrote:
Smears wrote:Because Stuart, most reasonable people who carry guns legally aren't actually doing shit like this. They exercise judgment before they take a life.






Smears' the statistics are bad: drive by shootings, school ground massacres, terrorist threats, the list is so lang, that it begs the question of who is actually reasonable? In my book, to opurchase a gun is a sign of some irrationality.

Remeber the old saying: "those who live by the gun die by the gun"?

( If you are a hunter after wildlife, may be an excepption).


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 27000
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Moreno » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:01 am

Stuartp523 wrote:
Moreno wrote:
Stuartp523 wrote:Moreno, I agree in that he should no longer be able to carry a gun in public, but can you think of a situation when it would ever be anything but reckless for anyone to carry a gun in public?
I'd take away his right completely, not just in public. IOW I don't think he should be trusted to have a gun, period. Then to the general issue....the whole gun thing is a mess. I get along with people who are against the NRA on most things, but I tend to think it is good Americans have guns, given their own government. The focus on the right to carry in public....ah, I don't even want to get into it.


The last thing I want to do is discuss the issue of the legality of guns, but I do think the subject of carrying a gun in public has much merit to the case. If Zimmerman was reckless it was for doing what is legal and apparently widely accepted in Florida.
It is legal to do a great many foolish things. I think people should lose certain kinds of power if they are foolish. This includes drivers. It is not necessarily illegal to drive poorly. But if it leads to a death, it's likely time to take away that driver's licence. If you are elderly and can't see well, you are not committing a crime, but, there goes the licence. These things are not easy to prove, but in Zimmerman's case his own testimony shows, to me, foolishness. Getting out of a car and following someone, in much of the US at night, is provocative behavior. He was carrying a gun, and his view of the person he was following was critical and negative. He was basically doing policework, and someone died. Without that gun he probably would not have done what he did, and that would have been better. I don't want this guy living across the street from me, and my teenage son, for example, if he can carry around a gun. I don't trust him on evidence.

Who are these people who take advantage of the law that allows them to legally carry a gun around in public and why don't we hear more about tragedies that result from their recklessness?

There may be some data on this. You could try googling it.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Moreno » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:07 am

fuse wrote:2) In spite of being almost 30 years old, he lacked the judgment to prevent himself from having to kill a kid.

you don't know how it went down. maybe he was blindsided by Martin's attack. he killed Martin, that's a given, but he cannot be held totally accountable for the escalation of things if Martin attacked him and was going to beat him to death.[/quote]According to his version he got out of his car, at night, and followed somebody. If you are correct about what might have happened, then he got close enough to Martin - whom he was following at night and very likely did not come off like just another pedestrian - to get blindsided. Poor judgment. Poor judgment with a gun. Poor judgment about how his own behavior might be threatening - to an innocent person, to someone who has been mugged before, to someone who has been harrassed by gangs, etc. Also he is escalating the situation. Sure, the police would do this, but one, it is there job, they have formal training, they have a range of weapons, they will not be mistaken for a mugger, it is a bigger crime to attack them and this is a deterrent if the person is guilty of something, there will likely be more than one.

It was poor judgment by an armed person. He may be innocent of a crime, but he should not have a gun again. And he should probably do some kind of community service.
I am now upping my ante.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Moreno » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:07 am

fuse wrote:2) In spite of being almost 30 years old, he lacked the judgment to prevent himself from having to kill a kid.

you don't know how it went down. maybe he was blindsided by Martin's attack. he killed Martin, that's a given, but he cannot be held totally accountable for the escalation of things if Martin attacked him and was going to beat him to death.[/quote]According to his version he got out of his car, at night, and followed somebody. If you are correct about what might have happened, then he got close enough to Martin - whom he was following at night and very likely did not come off like just another pedestrian - to get blindsided. Poor judgment. Poor judgment with a gun. Poor judgment about how his own behavior might be threatening - to an innocent person, to someone who has been mugged before, to someone who has been harrassed by gangs, etc. Also he is escalating the situation. Sure, the police would do this, but one, it is there job, they have formal training, they have a range of weapons, they will not be mistaken for a mugger, it is a bigger crime to attack them and this is a deterrent if the person is guilty of something, there will likely be more than one.

It was poor judgment by an armed person. He may be innocent of a crime, but he should not have a gun again. And he should probably do some kind of community service.
I am now upping my ante.
User avatar
Moreno
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 10305
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 5:46 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:22 am

Stuartp523 wrote:Smears, have you ever been in public place while carrying a concealed gun? Didn't you say that you woke up one morning after drinking and found someone else's gun? Ok, but maybe that had all taken place inside your house, but that's just one example of the exploits you've shared with us. It's very surprising to me how critical you're being of Zimmerman's actions when you have never said anything to lead me to believe you are one who doesn't on occasion do reckless things. I don't ask that you justify anything you do or even your contrarianism, and I have no criticism of you as a person whatsoever, but it seems to me you have been fortunate.


Dude, this might be the first time I've ever even said this, but this is a total ad hom.

I didn't kill anyone. If anything, I stole a gun from a guy like Zimmerman.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 27000
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Helandhighwater » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:25 am

Hmm what case is next is my only concern. You're laws are funny. I think the rest of the non gun owning Western world and the rest of the gun owning world is perhaps just watching you, to see how it should not work. ;)

Sometimes the only way you can make viable gun laws is to have them fucked over some many times that it then becomes ludicrous to keep using them like some nodding duck, but the US, well see you in 21000. Your always going to support your gun laws. Let's see how many innocent people die before 21000 before you realise that outdated gun laws are for shit. :)

Guns don't kill people of course, but if you don't have them then the King of England and your stockpile of guns will then mean you might be killed by no one. Stupid isn't it. Constitution. Nation of fools. ;)
"smoke me a kipper Skipper I'll be back for Breakfast."

Arnold Judas RImmer V2.0. AKA Ace.

"
Helandhighwater wrote:Feel free to tell me what happened today to your sphincter, and at length, I am very interested in your ass. Pun intended. :evil:

"
User avatar
Helandhighwater
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri May 18, 2012 1:13 pm

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 12:24 pm

fuse wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:Zimmerman was looking for a fight that night - it's evident in his statements and actions.

Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


Where? i already showed what i'm basing my judgments on - what do you base these contrary ones on?
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:03 pm

Hel, could you possibly be bothered to make a distinguish between he gun laws in question on this thread?
Last edited by Stuart on Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:23 pm

uglypeoplefucking wrote:
fuse wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:Zimmerman was looking for a fight that night - it's evident in his statements and actions.

Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


Where? i already showed what i'm basing my judgments on - what do you base these contrary ones on?


The same exact information that you based your judgments on. That's the point.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby Stuart » Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:27 pm

Right, we've been reducing the level of the argument continuously just to keep up.
Stuart
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3027
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:32 am
Location: California

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby uglypeoplefucking » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:00 pm

statiktech wrote:
uglypeoplefucking wrote:
fuse wrote:Or he was justifiably upset about crime and escaped criminals in his neighborhood, made a wrong assumption about Trayvon Martin, and never intended to fight/provoke him - it's evident in his statements and actions.


Where? i already showed what i'm basing my judgments on - what do you base these contrary ones on?


The same exact information that you based your judgments on. That's the point.


No way, Statik - i want to know specifically what evidence could possibly lead you to these conclusions, particularly that Zimmerman never intended to fight or provoke Martin. You can't simply take the evidence i based my judgments on, posit the precise opposite judgment, and then claim to be using the same info. A certain amount of skepticism of what someone else says is all well and good, but a response like the one you just gave is simply lazy.
i am brilliant, you are stupid. Therefore, you are wrong.
uglypeoplefucking
Philosopher
 
Posts: 4147
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:47 pm
Location: throughout

Re: Zimmerman Trial

Postby statiktech » Thu Jul 18, 2013 8:06 pm

I'm not claiming to know what Zimmerman intended. I don't fancy myself a mind reader. What I can tell you is that your conclusions hardly follow from the evidence.

You said he was looking for a fight. Why? Because he called someone an asshole? Because he wrongly suspected someone of mischief? Because he chose to monitor Martin's activity and took a weapon to protect himself? None of that necessarily suggests he was looking for a fight. His 911 call shows concern, not malicious intent.
"Man is the animal that laughs at himself."
—Robert A Heinlein
User avatar
statiktech
SonOfABitchBastard
 
Posts: 5414
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 8:53 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA

PreviousNext

Return to Challenges



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users